Level 35 Troll

KYOUBAI IS SUPER-SERIOUS BUSINESS

We’ve talked about limiting the number of votes based on your Buildr score. In other words, the higher your buildr score, the more votes you are allowed, based on a percentage of the total submissions.

This isn’t a bad idea, but I’d like to propose an alternative: Weighted Voted.

First off, a submission has to reach a much lower negative number to be ‘killed’, or we simply remove the stipulation that a certain negative value kills a submission.

Secondly, everyone can vote once for everything.

Next, if your buildr score is 1 or less, then each vote you cast only counts for 1 point. (98.6% of players fall into this category, i.e. 34,440 players out of 34,916)

If your buildr score is between 2 to 5, then each of your votes counts x2. (339 players or 0.98%)

If your buildr score is between 6 to 10, then each of your votes counts x3. (73 or 0.21%)

If your buildr score is between 11 to 15, then each of your votes counts x4. (27 or 0.08%)

If your buildr score is between 16+, then each of your votes counts x5. (37 or 0.11%)

Those that contribute more to the forum deserve a stronger influence on it’s future, because they’ve already demonstrated the value of their contributions. And as we can see, that’s less than 1.5% of the player-base.

Level 44 Emo Kid

I had the first bum avatar.

Acid Flux Posted:

We’ve talked about limiting the number of votes based on your Buildr score. In other words, the higher your buildr score, the more votes you are allowed, based on a percentage of the total submissions.

This isn’t a bad idea, but I’d like to propose an alternative: Weighted Voted.

First off, a submission has to reach a much lower negative number to be ‘killed’, or we simply remove the stipulation that a certain negative value kills a submission.

Secondly, everyone can vote once for everything.

Next, if your buildr score is 1 or less, then each vote you cast only counts for 1 point. (98.6% of players fall into this category, i.e. 34,440 players out of 34,916)

If your buildr score is between 2 to 5, then each of your votes counts x2. (339 players or 0.98%)

If your buildr score is between 6 to 10, then each of your votes counts x3. (73 or 0.21%)

If your buildr score is between 11 to 15, then each of your votes counts x4. (27 or 0.08%)

If your buildr score is between 16+, then each of your votes counts x5. (37 or 0.11%)

Those that contribute more to the forum deserve a stronger influence on it’s future, because they’ve already demonstrated the value of their contributions. And as we can see, that’s less than 1.5% of the player-base.

Upvoted. Interesting approach.

We definitely need something along the lines of weighted, limited voting in both buildrs. I have no freaking clue how the itembuildr ended up the way it did today. That’s just unreasonable.

Level 69 Emo Kid

Boo!

Acid Flux Posted:

We’ve talked about limiting the number of votes based on your Buildr score. In other words, the higher your buildr score, the more votes you are allowed, based on a percentage of the total submissions.

This isn’t a bad idea, but I’d like to propose an alternative: Weighted Voted.

First off, a submission has to reach a much lower negative number to be ‘killed’, or we simply remove the stipulation that a certain negative value kills a submission.

Secondly, everyone can vote once for everything.

Next, if your buildr score is 1 or less, then each vote you cast only counts for 1 point. (98.6% of players fall into this category, i.e. 34,440 players out of 34,916)

If your buildr score is between 2 to 5, then each of your votes counts x2. (339 players or 0.98%)

If your buildr score is between 6 to 10, then each of your votes counts x3. (73 or 0.21%)

If your buildr score is between 11 to 15, then each of your votes counts x4. (27 or 0.08%)

If your buildr score is between 16+, then each of your votes counts x5. (37 or 0.11%)

Those that contribute more to the forum deserve a stronger influence on it’s future, because they’ve already demonstrated the value of their contributions. And as we can see, that’s less than 1.5% of the player-base.

Wouldn’t this make it easier to downvote the competition? And will each of my alts with different buildr scores be able to vote?

Level 35 Troll

KYOUBAI IS SUPER-SERIOUS BUSINESS

Looks like it to me. His second weighted vote idea would allow two players with buildr scores of 6+ to kill off every submission in minutes.

Acid Flux Posted:

First off, a submission has to reach a much lower negative number to be ‘killed’, or we simply remove the stipulation that a certain negative value kills a submission.

Tresxae Posted:

There’s also the bumumption being made with these weighted voting systems that players with high buildr scores would act in the best interests of the game when voting. That’s a foolish thing to do.

Why is this foolish? FWZ has a significant amount of user-generated content. Those players that have made submissions that appealed to the general fanbase obviously have valuable input, and a sense of what is appropriate to the FWZ Universe.

Additionally, it would be bumumed that those players that have the strongest input via weighted votes would be watched a bit more closely than the average player, so that they do not abuse their power.

And to answer another question posed, I think votes should be limited to players, not characters. All of your characters can make submissions as normal, but only your highest buildr score character is the one that gets to vote.

Level 51 Emo Kid

“Razor Ramon”

Acid Flux Posted:

Why is this foolish?

People with high buildr scores can be bumholes and abuse the system if they want just like anyone else.

Acid Flux Posted:

FWZ has a significant amount of user-generated content. Those players that have made submissions that appealed to the general fanbase obviously have valuable input, and a sense of what is appropriate to the FWZ Universe.

Another bumumption that because someone has a high buildr score, they will do the right thing. Are you aware that people can and DO down vote entries in order to bubble their entries to the top and beat down the competition? Giving them the potential to have 5 times the votes can make that sort of voting much worse than it currently is.

Acid Flux Posted:

Additionally, it would be bumumed that those players that have the strongest input via weighted votes would be watched a bit more closely than the average player, so that they do not abuse their power.

Here is where you really lose me because you seem to acknowledge that people will need to be policed since there’s still the ability to abuse these weighted systems. If the more powerful voters will need to be watched, someone… mostly likely ET, will have to take the time to do that. That’s wasting time of his that he could be working on something else for the game. The ideal system would have no need to police anyone and eliminate the douchebaggery that goes on now.

Acid Flux Posted:

remove the stipulation that a certain negative value kills a submission.

This I missed the first time around. If you want to remove the ability to kill a submission, then just remove downvoting. It would be a simple upvote (+1) or pbum (0). If someone pbumes on everything would that same effect of them not voting at all and have no effect on the scores. A small group of players could no longer eliminate just about every submission in a few minutes before everyone else gets to look at them. And players couldn’t downvote their competition in order to “win” for the week.

Level 35 Troll

KYOUBAI IS SUPER-SERIOUS BUSINESS

Your last part, about removing downvoting completely, coupled with my weighted scoring system, is probably the best solution.

I know you have concerns about ‘jerkvoting’, but that’s going to be a potential risk in any situation where players have input into the system.

What I would prefer overall is a system where the top 5% (or less) of submissions are reviewed by CZ (or even a group of veteran players that they personally select), and from those ‘Finalists’, they choose which one to add into the game. Any of these ‘Judges’ that have a submission in the Final Round would have to recuse him/herself from the final process for that particular round, to keep it fair.

In other words, it’s our job as the player-base to filter out the majority of the drek, and submit to them a handful of choices to pick from. Automatically adding content just because it got the most votes is a bad system, IMO.

Level 69 Permanoob

“Permanoob”

Wylin Posted:

Suggestion: Have an area for submissions that have been -5’d and allow people to look through them and potentially raise them from the dead if they get voted back above 0.

This is a nice simple solution, to give things that hit -5 a chance to recover, or at least let people see all the things that have been voted off, so people can learn from the ‘failures’ of others, which will help all entries become better.